Derby Talk - Number of Preps

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

jimbo66 wrote:

 
> Doug O\'Neill is high on Declan\'s Moon?  He isn\'t the trainer,
> so that is interesting.

In that case, I take back what Doug O\'Neil said about him.

CtC

[derby1592]

I don\'t claim to have the answer on the 3-prep vs. 2-prep question. I think it is a legitimate concern but I don\'t think there is very much useful data to answer the question.

One thing is certain and that is that trainers of Derby contenders today are racing them much less often than in the past (for various reasons).

It was not that long ago that top Derby horses regularly made their final preps in the Derby Trial (held a week or less before the Derby) or the Blue Grass (Alysheba prepped in the Blue Grass when it was held only 10 days before the Derby). Several other major preps (e.g., Wood and Aks Derby) were only 2 weeks prior to the Derby not that long ago.  

So to look back and say that very few horses have won the Derby off only 2 preps is pretty meaningless because the ONLY reason a horse would have come into the Derby with less than 3 preps in the past was because of physical problems that kept them from running more often as opposed to by trainer design (there may be a few exceptions but only a few).

This is even true this year and in recent years. Injuries are the main reason for the abbreviated schedules. Even the one recent oft-cited \"poster-child\" for the foolishness of 2 preps (Point Given) probably had his limited pre-derby campaign dictated more by well-documented chronic foot problems than trainer intent (despite what Baffert said post TC).

I am still on the fence with this one until we have more data. Maybe 3 preps is better than 2 but I would not \"bet\" on it.

Chris

P.S. To illustrate how any single anecdotal example is questionable, let us take a closer look at Real Quiet who was mentioned in some previous posts. He did have 3 Derby preps as a 3yo \"sort of.\" The first of the three was on Jan 18th (less than 3 weeks into the 3yo season) when he ran an \"18\" in the slop at GG and finished 8th by 22 lengths in what was by far the worst performance of his career. It is hard for me to believe that that performance was the key to conditioning him to win the Derby...

[Silver Charm]

The \"Rules\" over the last couple of years have become the exceptions.

Hence there really is no longer an established method for bringing a horse up to the Derby, or a gelding rule, NY Bred rule, Pa Bred rule or Fool Qualifiers.

Wasn\'t that long ago that The Hollywood Futurity was considered a kiss a death. If Declans Moon doesn\'t win the Derby it will not be because of that. Nick Zito is probably more comfortable giving his horses a certain number of Preps because it fits with how he trains his horse everyday. When was the last time you saw a Shug horse work a bullet or a Baffert horse who didn\'t.

Find yourself a Derby Day horse who has good tactical speed, a solid price and is \"fast\" going in. War Emblem, Funny Cide and Smarty Jones seem to come to mind.  

Perhaps there are a new set of Rules. Hmmmmmmm

[spa]

Fellow players, it\'s not the preps at 3, but being a grade 1 winner at 2!!!!!!!!

[NoCarolinaTony]

Spa,

Funny Cide won NY State Stakes at 2. Smarty won non Graded at 2.  Charismatic won a Mdn Claimer at 2, War Emblem  a MSW etc. Historically G1 at 2 made sense but not lately. I still say conditioning at 3 makes sense to handle the extra distance they\'ve never covered. Until it\'s proven otherwise, I\'ll side with history and conditioning at this point.I think this one particular race with the added distance requires more conditioning. However, I\'ll keep an open mind if a really special one pops up in the next 6 -10 weeks.

Yes trainers are adapting and changing training methods and we should adapt too.  Someone will eventually  prove it can be done a new and different. (Hopefully without enhancements, additives, steroids et al).

NC Tony

[spa]

You must not remember when the Derby was fixed with an aspirin and you give too much credit to these cab drivers turned trainers, no offense to cab drivers. My point is foundation at 2. The sheets prove my point. A young horse running fast, don\'t last. Bob Baffert is Wayne Lucas light. Wayne says, Bob is on a lifetime scholarship. It\'s all history,baby.

[Dougie Sal]

Dude\'s, It\'s just a horse-race. I think everyone over-does it with the Derby. It\'s typically won by a fast horse, who gets a good trip, and comes into the race with good recent form.

A horse like Thunder Gulch would be a recent exception, he ran a dreadful race in the Blue Grass, but his numbers on the go-back suggested that he was a fast enough horse to compete in the Derby.

I always felt Thunder Gulch hated Keeneland anyway. As a sire, there have been numerous offspring of Thunder Gulch who have run poorly at KEE and come back to run dazzling at Churchill a few weeks later. Spain (a daughter of TG) ran a luckluster race at KEE, than won the Breeders Cup Distaff at 50-to-1 odds a few weeks later at Churchill. Invisible Ink (a son of TG) ran a very mediocre race in the Blue Grass at KEE, than three weeks later he ran 2nd in the Kentucky Derby at something like 50-to-1 odds.

>2.  However, one could also argue that running a demanding 1 1/4 without a proper foundation would result in damaging the horse and also causing a regression in the next start.<

That was the point I was making also.  It is possible.

I once saw a study that indicated that if you gave a horse 1 sprint prep off a layoff for a route the horse would actually go backwards. If you gave it 2 sprint preps you were much better off.    

Personlly, I don\'t have an opinion on this because I\'ve never studied the details of all the horses that failed. I doubt the sample is big enough anyway and I believe the individual trainer is probably a factor.  

However, when presented with a stat that \"appears\" to suggest that 3 preps is better than 2 along with other evidence I have seen that suggested that horses as a group tended to peak in the 3rd/4th starts off a layoff, I can\'t imagine that 2 preps is better than 3.

So it seems obvious to me that if I have 2 horses that I think have a 20% chance of winning based on their form and they are both 6-1, I\'d rather have the one with 3 preps. Even if the stat is meaningless I am not giving anything up. If the stat is meaningful, I am obviously better off. I believe this is the proper way of thinking about it until the sample is large enough to draw concrete conclusions.



Post Edited (03-02-05 09:22)

[MO]

Real Quiet was beaten by THREE different garbage cans in New Mexico. As a former horseracing TV and radio host on that circuit I can tell you that there are only two feasible suggestions as to his form reversal after the trip to New Mexico.

The first has to be looked at in the context of larceny, since that is the big topic these days. Real Quiet was uncoupled with post time favorite Indian Charlie. Both were trained by Baffert. RQ was 8-1. With the KY medication rules \"different\" in that state, larceny (drugged up Real Quiet?) is not far fetched. (Zito\'s success in KY is another example as he is a 10% er at best everywhere else).

The second feasible suggestion is the difference in altitude causing a lackluster performance. Rule # 1 when handicapping a shipper from anywhere to Albuquerque, Santa Fe or El Paso is TOSS HIM, as the change in altitude (which translates into thinner air) often causes a horse to have difficulty breathing. Below is a small sample of altitudes at various race tracks:

Santa Anita - 256 feet above sea level
Del Mar - 476 feet...
Pimlico - 196 feet..
Belmont Park- 131 feet...
Churchill Downs - 477 feet..
Sunland Park - 3,762 feet...
Downs at Albuquerque - 5,326 feet

 Real Quiet has not been a REAL Star in the breeding shed. Below is his record as stallion:

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/isd/stallion.aspx?stallion=realquiet

Was Real Quiet juiced up for the triple crown, or did he get just beat by the altitude in New Mexico? We may never know.

TGJB

>And VG is one of very few horses of the last 10 years to run in all 3 TC races and go on to have any real success at 4.<

I think rate of development has something to do with this. Early bloomers would tend to do better in the Derby than late bloomers because it\'s so early in the year. The typical Derby winner is not fast enough to beat the best older horses. Not running well at 4 could be a matter of their peak early bloomer form at 3 not being good enough to do well against the typical faster 4 year old. I think we see a lot of that when horses go from 2 to 3 also.  

Some horses have been retired for economic reasons.

However, there\'s little doubt that the Derby preparation and the triple crown are grueling. It\'s certainly no shock when some of those horses wind up with physical problems later in the year.

[jimbo66]

MO,

If Real Quiet went straight from New Mexico to Kentucky, maybe your argument makes sense.  However, Real Quiet did not \"suddenly and magically\" blossom in the Derby.  He ran two good races in California, including a very very good one in the Santa Anita Derby where he was coming hard at the end and getting to a perfect trip winner in Indian Charlie.  That is why he was 8-1 and not 800-1, which he would have been if he came straight from New Mexico.

As for failure in the breeding shed pointing to \"cheating\" on the race course, that is not a fair or accurate statement.  Many great horses have not been great sires.

[SoCalMan2]

Having been to Del Mar and having seen the ocean from the grandstand, I find it very hard to believe the the racing strip is 47 stories higher than sea level.

[MO]

Just to clarify - I should have said San Diego, not Del Mar is 476 feet above sea level. But you get the point.

As for Real Quiet - my point about altitude is that maybe his races in NM were bad as a result of the change in altitude coming to NM from CA. His triple crown (and subsequent races) could easily have been juiced up performances. He did not figure on dosage and with all the light shining on drug use now, who\'s to say that RQ didn\'t get vet help while Baffert and friends cashed big tickets on the \"weaker\" half of the entry?

[TGJB]

California shippers just ran 1-2-3 in the Borderland Derby at Sunland Park.

As far as RQ is concerned, the other possibility is plain old development, and some of us liked the way his sheet looked. I certainly don\'t think the Derby is the place for a betting coup-- there\'s an awful lot at stake without cashing a bet.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

I bet Indian Charlie that race. But Real Quiet ran a bang up Santa Anita Derby and made a lot of sense at 8-1. I think Charlie was the favorite. I really can\'t remember.